Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34269682›Full record

ReviewJMIR medical informatics2021

Effect of Interventions With a Clinical Decision Support System for Hospitalized Older Patients: Systematic Review Mapping Implementation and Design Factors.

Birgit A Damoiseaux-Volman, Nathalie van der Velde, Sil G Ruige, Johannes A Romijn, Ameen Abu-Hanna, Stephanie Medlock

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Telemedicine Implementation for Safety Net Populations: A Systematic Review.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Health and Wellbeing in Aging.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Birgit A Damoiseaux-VolmanDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2779-8211
Nathalie van der VeldeSection of Geriatric Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6477-6209
Sil G RuigeDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8417-9156
Johannes A RomijnDepartment of Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0676-0409
Ameen Abu-HannaDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4324-7954
Stephanie MedlockDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2679-8095

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical decision support systems (CDSSs) form an implementation strategy that can facilitate and support health care professionals in the care of older hospitalized patients.

objectiveOur study aims to systematically review the effects of CDSS interventions in older hospitalized patients. As a secondary aim, we aim to summarize the implementation and design factors described in effective and ineffective interventions and identify gaps in the current literature.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review with a search strategy combining the categories older patients, geriatric topic, hospital, CDSS, and intervention in the databases MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS. We included controlled studies, extracted data of all reported outcomes, and potentially beneficial design and implementation factors. We structured these factors using the Grol and Wensing Implementation of Change model, the GUIDES (Guideline Implementation with Decision Support) checklist, and the two-stream model. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Effective Practice and Organisation of Care risk of bias approach.

resultsOur systematic review included 18 interventions, of which 13 (72%) were effective in improving care. Among these interventions, 8 (6 effective) focused on medication review, 8 (6 effective) on delirium, 7 (4 effective) on falls, 5 (4 effective) on functional decline, 4 (3 effective) on discharge or aftercare, and 2 (0 effective) on pressure ulcers. In 77% (10/13) effective interventions, the effect was based on process-related outcomes, in 15% (2/13) interventions on both process- and patient-related outcomes, and in 8% (1/13) interventions on patient-related outcomes. The following implementation and design factors were potentially associated with effectiveness: a priori problem or performance analyses (described in 9/13, 69% effective vs 0/5, 0% ineffective interventions), multifaceted interventions (8/13, 62% vs 1/5, 20%), and consideration of the workflow (9/13, 69% vs 1/5, 20%).

conclusionsCDSS interventions can improve the hospital care of older patients, mostly on process-related outcomes. We identified 2 implementation factors and 1 design factor that were reported more frequently in articles on effective interventions. More studies with strong designs are needed to measure the effect of CDSS on relevant patient-related outcomes, investigate personalized (data-driven) interventions, and quantify the impact of implementation and design factors on CDSS effectiveness.

trial registrationPROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): CRD42019124470; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=124470.

Indexed as

agedclinical decision support systemsgeriatricshospitalquality of care

Identifiers

PMID34269682
PMCPMC8325084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.